[smably]

Follow up number 2..........

Project is being delivered by Metrolinx, though the City is paying.

Someone at Mx will need to account for what seems like extraordinary inflation.

Extraordinary is right. I really am struggling to understand what's going on here.

I went back through the transportation services budgets and the cost escalation is absurd.

2020: $20 million
2021: $51 million
2022: $52.650 million
2023: $83.775 million
2024: $148.005 million

If I were the type to believe in conspiracy theories, I'd be tempted to think that someone (Metrolinx?) has it out for the railpath. Absent a major scope change, how does a project go from around $50 million to around $150 million in the span of two years? Especially since, if the city's project page is to be believed, detailed design was completed in 2020.

 

[Towered]

For that kind of money, it better damn well include the bridge from the No Frills site over the tracks to Sorauren Park and the upcoming Wabash Community Centre.

 

[Northern Light]

Extraordinary is right. I really am struggling to understand what's going on here.

I went back through the transportation services budgets and the cost escalation is absurd.

2020: $20 million
2021: $51 million
2022: $52.650 million
2023: $83.775 million
2024: $148.005 million

If I were the type to believe in conspiracy theories, I'd be tempted to think that someone (Metrolinx?) has it out for the railpath. Absent a major scope change, how does a project go from around $50 million to around $150 million in the span of two years? Especially since, if the city's project page is to be believed, detailed design was completed in 2020.

Very good questions.

And Metrolinx ought to have answer them, publicly.

 

[rdaner]

Could the larger budget include a larger scope for the project? I know that eventually it is supposed to go all the way to Sudbury.

 

[ShonTron]

Could the larger budget include a larger scope for the project? I know that eventually it is supposed to go all the way to Sudbury.

That’s the only way this makes sense, especially as Metrolinx is building the new King-Liberty Station pretty much where the planned Railpath empties out.

 

[rdaner]

^If that is the case then we are looking at 10-12 bridges.

 

[smably]

Could the larger budget include a larger scope for the project? I know that eventually it is supposed to go all the way to Sudbury.

Can you clarify what you mean by this? The scope has always included a southern terminus at Sudbury and Abell, with four bridges (Barrie Line, Lansdowne, Brock, and Queen). Extending to King will almost certainly require another round of public consultation, budgeting, and property acquisition.

 

[Allandale25]

Extraordinary is right. I really am struggling to understand what's going on here.

I went back through the transportation services budgets and the cost escalation is absurd.

2020: $20 million
2021: $51 million
2022: $52.650 million
2023: $83.775 million
2024: $148.005 million

If I were the type to believe in conspiracy theories, I'd be tempted to think that someone (Metrolinx?) has it out for the railpath. Absent a major scope change, how does a project go from around $50 million to around $150 million in the span of two years? Especially since, if the city's project page is to be believed, detailed design was completed in 2020.

Is the 2024 number fully funded? I'm being lazy and haven't clicked on any links but does it provide a breakdown of the components?

 

[Northern Light]

Is the 2024 number fully funded?

Yes.

but does it provide a breakdown of the components?

No.

****

However; @smably

I did find a note on the cost increase for the project under the Capacity to Spend section of the budget notes:

 

[rdaner]

Can you clarify what you mean by this? The scope has always included a southern terminus at Sudbury and Abell, with four bridges (Barrie Line, Lansdowne, Brock, and Queen). Extending to King will almost certainly require another round of public consultation, budgeting, and property acquisition.

Hi! Please ignore the 10-12 bridges comment as it was hyperbole on my part. Lol

 

[smably]

I did find a note on the cost increase for the project under the Capacity to Spend section of the budget notes:

View attachment 532588

I would have thought that noise wall installation would be a Metrolinx responsibility. Why would the city be required to pay for noise walls as part of a multi-use path project?

 

[Northern Light]

I would have thought that noise wall installation would be a Metrolinx responsibility. Why would the city be required to pay for noise walls as part of a multi-use path project?

A very good question, and one that I think someone should ask Metrolinx and the City.

 

[Allandale25]

Yes.



No.

****

However; @smably

I did find a note on the cost increase for the project under the Capacity to Spend section of the budget notes:

View attachment 532588

Thanks. If it's fully funded then 'all's well that ends well'. Disappointing that it had to go up and I appreciate the concept of opportunity cost, but not sure what flexibility there is given some of those components. Maybe they should have been better understood earlier? Just fits a pattern North American-wide of cost increases.

 

[max]

I would have thought that noise wall installation would be a Metrolinx responsibility. Why would the city be required to pay for noise walls as part of a multi-use path project?

Do we know that the city is expected to cover the cost or could this be a situation where because the City is doing the railpath and this infrastructure is adjacent, the city will just do all the work together and be reimbursed for noise wall costs by Metrolinx?

As noted by others, it's a Metrolinx corridor and obviously the noise walls are necessary because of the rail activity and not to keep train conductors from hearing me ring my bell on the path. The expense should ultimately be covered by Metrolinx and the walls should be owned and maintained by them in the long term.

 

[Northern Light]

Do we know that the city is expected to cover the cost or could this be a situation where because the City is doing the railpath and this infrastructure is adjacent, the city will just do all the work together and be reimbursed for noise wall costs by Metrolinx?

As noted by others, it's a Metrolinx corridor and obviously the noise walls are necessary because of the rail activity and not to keep train conductors from hearing me ring my bell on the path. The expense should ultimately be covered by Metrolinx and the walls should be owned and maintained by them in the long term.

Metrolinx is carrying out the project on behalf of the City and is responsible for any tendering and final costing adjustments.